Three solutions for a permanent end to the war

Kayhan, in an article, outlined ways to achieve a permanent end to the war with the United States. According to the article, America’s war against Iran follows very specific rules, and without understanding them, achieving a lasting end to the conflict is impossible.

The end of geographic immunity

Khorasan addressed the IRGC’s recent statement and wrote: The IRGC’s recent declaration about extending the war beyond the region marks an official shift from a traditional defensive doctrine to a strategy of expansive offensive deterrence. For the United States, the IRGC’s warning is the final blow to the theory of fighting wars far from its borders.

Iran’s model of symmetric deterrence in an asymmetric war

Kayhan, in an article on Iran’s new deterrence model, wrote: "The common assumption is that Iran’s energy infrastructure is a vulnerability and an easy target in wartime." However, Iran’s new deterrence strategy is built on the principle that any damage to these infrastructures will trigger a chain of reciprocal insecurity and infrastructural destruction.

How Iran endured

Resalat examined why Iran has endured in the current war and under Trump’s naval blockade. Iran demonstrated in this war that even under security and military pressure, it can use its economic capacities as instruments of power.

The world is compelled to accept a new global order

Siasate-Rooz: The world today is inevitably moving toward a new global order — one in which the expulsion of the US from West Asia, unified confrontation with Israel, an end to foreign interventions, the cessation of warmongering and domination, and the genuine revival of international law and national sovereignty become fundamental principles.

Global economy in the shadow of the Middle East crisis

Hamshahri analyzed the surge in energy prices and the global economic crisis, writing that rising geopolitical tensions in the Middle East and the jump in energy prices have now become one of the most significant threats to the US economy.

A war with a painful outcome for America

Kayhan, in an editorial, examined the goals of Israel and the United States in their war with Iran and the failure of those goals. The editorial wrote: launching the Ramadan War was essentially an admission by the US and the Israeli regime that they had failed to achieve their objectives in the 12‑day war.

Trump's repeated defeats

Siasat-e-Rooz dedicated its editorial to Iran’s power and the United States’ repeated failures. According to the editorial, the United States, in an unsuccessful attempt to break Iran’s strategic control over the Strait of Hormuz, imposed a naval blockade on Iranian ports in the Persian Gulf.

Kayhan: Humiliation behind the Strait of Hormuz

Kayhan, in an editorial, analyzed what it called more than 70 days of America’s humiliation behind the Strait of Hormuz. According to the paper, every war creates a new political‑security and economic order, and the larger the parties involved, the greater and more global the transformation of equations.

American calculations failed

Hamshahri analyzed why US strategic calculations failed in the Ramadan War. According to the article, more than two months after the conflict began, international analysts believe Washington has not achieved its initial goals.

Iran’s language of force in the Strait of Hormuz pays off 

Kayhan published an analysis examining what it described as the 48‑hour failure of Trump’s ‘Freedom Project’ in the Strait of Hormuz. According to the article, the failure of this operation proved that Iran’s naval power cannot be shaken by propaganda. A blockade that began with pride was shattered by missiles, leaving ‘the language of force’ as the only valid response to Trump.

Deterrence through punishing the aggressor

Hamshahri, in an article about Iran’s power in the Strait of Hormuz, quoted Hossein Ajorlou, a regional affairs expert as saying: After the 40‑day war between Iran and the Zionist regime and the United States, the Strait of Hormuz became an advantage in Iran’s hands, and the Islamic Republic is trying to pursue the concept of ‘deterrence through punishing the aggressor’ using this strait.

Jam-e-Jam: The mirage of easy victory

Jam-e-Jam analyzed Israel's illusion of the rapid destruction of Iran. When Israel began its crimes after the Al-Aqsa storm, Netanyahu spoke of creating a new order in the Middle East. It is clear that Israel's security will only be fully ensured when there is no powerful country left in the region that can resist the excesses of this regime.

Two scenarios lie ahead for Trump

Etemad, in an interview with Gholamreza Karimi, associate professor of international relations, examined the scenarios ahead for Trump. According to Gholamreza Karimi, the root of the current crisis lies in the fundamental contradiction between Iran’s insistence on preserving its nuclear rights and the United States’ insistence on completely eliminating those rights — a contradiction that has turned into an unsolved puzzle for Washington.

The Strait of Hormuz as a key pillar of Iran’s deterrence

Kayhan, in an analysis, discussed the importance of the Strait of Hormuz for Iran and wrote: Iran proved in the Ramadan War that it is not easy to engage with the Islamic Republic, but it did not reach the point where the enemy would avoid fighting it altogether. During the war, Trump was surprised that Iran stood firm

Economic warfare: The fourth level of conflict

Javan examined the aspects of the Ramadan War in an article. The newspaper wrote: The Ramadan War had four levels or four types: moral security, military, and economic dimensions.

US positions remain an obstacle to agreement

Sobh-e-No expresses its view on the lack of positive progress and the halt in negotiations in Islamabad: A brief look at the trajectory of Trump’s war‑related and negotiation‑related scenarios shows that his current approach to shaping news about the talks is shifting away from the core issues and toward secondary, less constructive distractions.

A staged terror show in Washington

Kayhan, in an article, addressed Trump’s attempted assassination at a correspondents’ Dinner. Trump, who is under intense pressure these days due to his costly and failed war against Iran, staged another terror show against himself on Sunday evening so that he could perhaps turn the situation in his favor with the help of a bullet.

War with Iran drives a wedge between Trump and Catholics 

Shargh published an article discussing Pope Leo XIV’s stance against the US war with Iran. Pope Leo XIV has taken a firm position opposing the war. He almost continuously condemns the war against Iran and tries to highlight its moral and humanitarian ugliness for the public.

How Trump shifted his approach after battlefield setbacks

The Iran newspaper analyzed what it described as a shift in Trump’s strategy. The paper writes: It appears that nearly two months after the start of the war, and with battlefield limitations becoming clear, Trump’s effort to redefine the war’s objectives and shift its weight from the battlefield to the realm of narrative and perception has become the central axis of US policy. Within this framework, the various claims about progress in negotiations or Iran’s willingness to reach an agreement reflect less the realities on the ground and more an information operation aimed at preserving a controlled image of the war’s trajectory.

The answer to the US naval blockade lies in closing the Bab al-Mandab Strait

Kayhan discussed the Bab al-Mandab Strait and the importance of closing it in an article. The paper wrote: The unveiling of the Bab al-Mandab Strait at the end of the two-week deadline opens a new front against Trump and his supporters, who will know that from now on there will be no safe spot for them in the vital arteries of the region.

TEHRAN PAPERS:

Two sides of the national interest coin

The Iran newspaper, in an analysis, discussed the country’s current approach, and quoted former representative Mansour Haghighatpour as saying: The battlefield and the negotiating table are two sides of the same coin. On one side lies power and steadfastness in the arena of conflict; on the other, diplomacy and dialogue.